Avoid failing on headers conflict
See original GitHub issueThe folowing error happen when a header has been set by the client library twice (one time in uppercase and another time in lower case. Failed to convert header keys to lower case due to field name conflict: {headerName}
.
It is certainly a bad practice to do so but the fact is that nock is used mostly to mock external libraries calls so it would be useful to be able to disable error throwing for such cases with some options.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 7 years ago
- Reactions:6
- Comments:19 (8 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
How to handle header name conflict with standerd library ...
3. The correct way to exclude local headers is to #include <...> · But the case is that library header includes wrong file....
Read more >Top 10 C++ header file mistakes and how to fix them
Mistake # 1: Not using “include guards” in a header file. ... You usually name your #include guard the same as the name...
Read more >c++ - How can I prevent header hell?
Clean up the includes after each refactoring (comment them out, see where compilation fails, move them there, remove the still commented include ...
Read more >Once-Only Headers (The C Preprocessor)
If a header file happens to be included twice, the compiler will process its contents twice. This is very likely to cause an...
Read more >CORS errors - HTTP - MDN Web Docs - Mozilla
If the CORS configuration isn't setup correctly, the browser console will present an error like "Cross-Origin Request Blocked: The Same ...
Read more >
Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start Free
Top Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Why hasn’t this been merged yet? It would appear to be a mostly harmless PR. Last given option should override earlier ones, like every other node library around.
@CFreeAtEbsco I just updated the test, everything looks good to me.